Ultimately, what was worse for western civilization, Germany's

>>1628566
French revolution. How is this even a question?

>>1628566
The French Revolution.

>>1628566
>any of those two things
>bad

Edgy

In the French revolution who were the main instigators of the lower classes?

>>1628566

Germany's defeat in the first world war of course. The french revolution was a good thing. But letting Albion sit ontop of the throne for even one minute more was just shit

>>1628616
The bourgeoise of course.

File: monarchism_by_duke_nidhoggr-d75rr0g.jpg (54KB, 347x581px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 347x581px

>>1628630
>The french revolution was a good thing.
>giving birth to egalitarianism, fascism, communism, socialism and other cancerous -isms

Surely you must be joking.

France losing the Franco-Prussian War.

>>1628566
Spotted the spooky positivist.

>>1628643
Austria loosing the Austro-Prussian war was even worse.

>>1628632
No, who of the lower classes led the revolt. Any names bios an that

>>1628684
But the revolt wasn't led by lower classes, it was led by the bourgeoise.

French Revolution.

But both are pretty bad.

The French revolution was the beginning of capitalism. Would you really rather live in a fuedal society? Come on nigga

>>1628715
Industrial revolution was the beginning of capitalism. French revolution was when the bourgeoise took political power rather than just being satisfied with having money.

File: 1472571175737.jpg (124KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 800x600px

>>1628566
Neither of those are bad things fuck off.

>Germany's defeat in the first world war

LMAO

What is this? 2013 /pol/?

Get with the times grandpa, Germany is the Rothschilds

>>1628744
Oh fuck you're right

File: dutch.jpg (82KB, 560x555px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 560x555px

>>1628744
Industrial revolution was result of capitalism. Capitalism starts with the VOC.

Dissolution of Soviet Union.

>>1628642
Quick lesson of the English language. Monarchism is a word too desu.

Anyway, the average citizen is probably going to be happy living in a egalitarian society with undertones of other -isms. Lets not become too hard of a frankaboo and take a step back to realize that the reason why most people revolted was because they were starving in the street. The French monarchy didn't give a rats ass about the people and it showed in how they responded to the entire famine thing.

>>1628828
>Monarchism is a word too desu.

It's not cancerous though.

>>1628828
>implying it was the "starving masses" that revolted and not a bunch of bourgeoise swines eternally assblasted they don't have the privileges of refined hereditary aristocracy

>>1628828
>The French monarchy didn't give a rats ass about the people and it showed in how they responded to the entire famine thing
It's not like only monarchies do this. All the other -isms aren't immune to such behavior.

>>1628836
Debatable. Monarchism has been opted by the alt-right and other reactionaries making it on the same footing as fascism and communism.

>>1628843
>implying
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sans-culottes
>implying
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_March_on_Versailles
>implying
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Guard_(France)
>implying
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storming_of_the_Bastille
>implying
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Man_and_of_the_Citizen

We can argue all night whether it was a giant plot by the bourgeoise to gain more power, but the truth is that most French civilians were on the side of the "bourgeoise" and that the poor of France really didn't like the monarchy. Hence the Sans-culottes, hence the Storming of the Bastille which was meant to be a monarchist's symbol, hence the creation of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, hence the fact that average Parisians flocked to join the new revolutionary guard, and hence the fact that the population of France never had a want to go back to the monarchies of the old.

>>1628869
Sure, I'm not saying they are immune to such behavior. However, if I was the average French person during the revolution, any alternative would be better than living under the monarchs who live in their high tower. France seems to be doing better than they were in the years leading up the revolution simply because they have a government, that if anything, at least pretends to care and get something done.

File: 1462797032871.jpg (23KB, 450x444px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 450x444px

>>1628908
>Monarchism has been opted by the alt-right
>monarchism has been around for literally thousands of years but I guess it's not valid because some memers on the internet

>>1628908
Most French civilians didn't give a fuck, it was mostly Parisians who participated in the revolution. People in the countryside were generally royalist to the point the king was downright shocked to discover there was a rural traitor who ratted him out.

>>1628933
>Something is old, therefore something is good

Hunting and Gathering society when?
Fuedal Society when?
Caste System when?
Emperors when?

There is a reason why no absolute monarchs exist anymore outside of third world countries and Saudi Arabia, it's because they sucked and the people overthrew them. Monarchists must then love Saudi Arabia because of their monarchy and coolness right? No, you guys probably hate it because it oppresses the people and the only reason why you hate them and not the old ones is because you aren't looking at them through nostalgia glasses of books written by people 300 years ago. Monarchies have no place in the modern society because it turns out having one country ruled entirely by one person generally leads to that person being an idiot about how to lead a country.

>>1628937
>I heard it once, so it must be right

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fear

Please, peasants and rural folks were the first ones to cut off the heads of the high class.

>>1628642

ow that edge

I don't get why ethnic nationalists would decry the French Revolution. You wouldn't have an ideology if not for the French Revolution and also Napoopan.

>>1628982
>Caste system when?
>Emperors when?

As soon as possible if you please.

>>1628982
>having one country ruled entirely by one person generally leads to that person being an idiot about how to lead a country.

Are you literally retarded? Those people were preparing to rule their countries from their childhood. But go on and support politicians who remain in power for no more than 4-8 years, they surely know better.

>>1628982
>Monarchists must then love Saudi Arabia because of their monarchy and coolness right?

My only beef with Saudi Arabia is that it's islamic. If they were good Christians I would see no problem.

>>1628987
t. fascist / communist

Hit a nerve?

>>1629002

no because the initial statement is both retarded and angsty

>>1629009
>retarded and angsty

You just described the French revolution

>>1628997
Kid, you're arguing with people on an anonymous Chinese Cartoon board. If that's indicative of anything, you'll be placed in the lower caste as soon as possible.

>>1628999
I guess that's why most monarchs propelled their country into greatness and why most monarchies are still going and why most people who lived in monarchies were not starving.

If you raise a retard who is given power for no reason other than his name, he is going to govern like a retard and generally be an idiot. That's why monarchies fail, because they are not as infallible as you think.

I don't know man, democracies have a better track record of not pushing their country into ruin than monarchies.

>>1629036
>he's unable to do personal sacrifices for greater societal good if it doesn't benefit him directly

Literally a female tier selfishness. Moreover, traditional monarchist theory is anti-meritocracy, as meritocracy itself is a pipe dream. See the Peter principle.

>Kid

I'm probably old enough to be your father.

>>1629036
Monarchies were up and running for more than a thousand years. Most democracies are less than 200 years old, and a lot of them are already in a crisis.

>>1629025

I don't think you know much about the french revolution.

>>1629069

Monarchies are only viable in a simple economy where 90% of the population is involved in agriculture. In a complex world it is impossible for one person to rule effectively. There might be many democracies in crisis but all monarchies and dictatorships are on crisis

>>1629107
>90% of Saudi Arabia is involved in agriculture

>>1629050
A caste system would be based on either your performance before the caste gets implemented or the performance of your parents and people you associate with. The first point would be completely lost with you not sacrificing everything you had for the government.

Do you think the olden generals of yore did what they did for fun? They did it because they had a love for the country and would die to see it prosper. So no, it's not female tier selfishness, in fact exactly the opposite. Most great men of history have sacrificed everything in order to get where they are from generals to business Leaders to heads of state. So no, you generally would not get handed your happiness on a silver platter unless you get to the second point in which case it's a quick dice that predicted your social class that you would generally lose because 98% of the population in France at the time was lower class.

Also

>I'm probably old enough to be your father.

And I feel pity on you for that. All that time and money in the world and you waste it on promoting monarchism instead of doing something productive.

>>1629036
>If you raise a retard who is given power for no reason other than his name, he is going to govern like a retard and generally be an idiot.

Nice projection. If a weak retard sits on the throne, a regent will control the state. Or one of his stronger relatives will replace him, which will ultimately be better for everyone.

>>1629107
>what's the Second Reich
>what's Austria-Hungary

>>1628566
Neither, the defeat of Napoleon was.

>>1629113
A country that is only propped up by it's location and has money due to oil which will probably collapse when the oil runs out or no one needs oil anymore.

Saudi Arabia could literally be a communist-fascist-neo-anarchist-fascist-happy land and still be rich just because of what comes from their ground.

>>1629069
please the only real democracy in the western world is Switzerland.

Oh and i don't care what people call it, wheather liberal, constitutional or parlamentary monarchy. If your country has a king, it is not a democracy period

How can there are people still defending monarch in 2016?
The worst thing there ever was. How can i accept someone is better than me because was sqeezed from the queen's cunt? kek
And nowdays it's even worst. Because in ancient times the king actually had power and he could do what he wanted. Nowdays royal families of european countries basically live a luxurious life without any kind of responsabilities.

>>1629148
Venezuela is also oil rich but they're poor and destitute as fuck, I wonder why

>>1629153
Because they aren't extracting it properly

Same as Yemen, what's in the ground isn't worth anything till you can market it

>>1629152
>How can i accept someone is better than me because was sqeezed from the queen's cunt?

This fucking simplification...

>>1629152
>How can i accept someone is better than me because was sqeezed from the queen's cunt?
Because said cunts ancestors at some point started to rule this country and by virtue of still ruling have proven to be fit to rule.

>>1629153
Because Saudi Arabia's oil is easier to get out and process. Same reason why the Midwest and Canada are absolute shit out of luck when it comes to oil. It costs absolutely nothing to extract oil and process it into gasoline in Saudi Arabia. But Venezuelan oil is different, it's harder, more dense, and closer to a solid than a liquid. Pretty much the same thing as the Tar Sands in Canada.

>>1629185
>Because said cunts ancestors at some point started to rule this country and by virtue of still ruling have proven to be fit to rule.

By that logic whoever is in charge deserves to be in charge, so every successful revolution is a good thing.

>>1629219
>Midwest oil

We are pretty strong with fracking right now.

t. Ohioan

File: 0e4143bf3e7af53a4f6e57951912193c.jpg (51KB, 401x464px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 401x464px

>This thread

>>1628908
>the alt-right being an advocate of monarchism makes it cancerous
you should really kill yourself

>>1628566

Germany's defeat.

Wouldn't have given rise to hitler, wouldn't have started absolute genocide, would have prevented nazism, rise of Stalin, could have prevented Communism rising.

>>1628604
>it was a good thing, trust me!!!

>>1628749
Republicuck, suck a dick.

File: 1471267689599.png (153KB, 462x496px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 462x496px

>>1628995
It's just people parroting their empty political beliefs that they got from a imageboard.

>>1629358
Monarchism isn't more or less cancerous in my eyes than socialism, fascism, communism, or any other ism. I don't even know what the word is used in this remark, but I assume it means simplified to the point where people espousing the idea have no idea what the idea actually means. In which case, yes, monarchism has been used by many individuals in the alt-right in ways that mirror how communism and socialism are used in the eyes of bleeding heart liberals.

>>1628775
the disolution of the URSS have good and bad things, but these topic its diferent

>>1629219
I dont know that fact about the oil in Venezuela

The French Revolution literally ruined everything.
Liberalism is a delusional cancer that will eventually kill its host.

File: tar-sands-in-hands1.jpg (40KB, 450x301px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 450x301px

>>1629550
This is pretty much where Venezuela's oil comes from.
It's just some version of fracking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_sands#Venezuela

>>1628566
The Front National wouldn't even exist without the French revolution, you contrarian poser.

You guys do realize the American Revolution was before the French one, right?

>>1629621

You do realise that the American Revolution was just some retards saying "We want to rule ourselves" whereas the French Revolution was a rejection of basically every political convention Europe had held for the past few thousand years?

>>1628843
LOL refined hereditary aristocracy. More like inbred almost mutants who can't even chew their own food. Nobles aren't superior just because you came out of the right cunt does not mean you will lead the country better than someone who rose through the ranks. In fact from looking at history it shows it would be even worse. Honestly monarchists should kill themselves and their families sold into slavery, they are that dumb.

>>1629168
It's not a simplification. Like at all, the only reason someone was king in the Medieval/Modern world was because he came from sperm from the right man, that inseminated the right egg that was in the right cunt and came out of it. A Roman style Imperial succesion is better, because it's more meritocratic and the Emperor can ADOPT competent people even adults so they can be the heir and a smart person can take over. Because basing your whole nation on the guy coming out of a certain cunt being a good leader is not very good. It will end up with either a petty tyrant who won't be removed from power unless extreme situations happen, an incompetent, and occasionally a good or even great leader.

>>1628843
It's cute and yet also sad that people are naive enough to believe that any real people's revolution is actually possible. Stalinist Russia and Ukraine is a perfect example of what actually happens.

>>1629676
Go dance with your snakes Ameripeasant, your ignotance is fucking laughable

>>1630192
Let me guess you are the Emperor and you want your dumplings now. Go fuck your sister monarchist.

???

What kind of question is this?

>>1630593
it's a bait thread anon

>>1630390
Don't you have a pair of briefs to shart in?

>>1629107
>Implying absolute monarchy is the only option

Belgium
Netherlands
Sweden
UK (Commonwealth)

are all monarchies and among countries with the highest human development index. Monarchy doesn't mean that you can't have democratic society.

>>1629634
You do realise that the French Revolution was just some bourgeois saying "We want to rule ourselves, fuck da nobles"?

File: 1467674752581.jpg (57KB, 544x468px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 544x468px

>>1628566
Both are good things though, but if forced to choose I'd say Germany's defeat. But only because that implies there's a Germany to be defeated in the first place.

>>1628643
>>1628674
This. Imagine if a Franco-Austrian alliance had crushed Prussia in 1866.

>>1631218
I'm a Dutchman myself and you're full of shit. We have monarchs, but in terms of institutions we might as well be republics. The monarchs have no or extremely limited power and competences (and we should probably get rid of them anyway because at this point they do nothing but leech taxmoney anyway
inb4 "muh tourisum" retards).

>Monarchy doesn't mean that you can't have democratic society.
Yes it does. Look up the etymology of monarchy: it means one rules, more often than not without popular sovereignity. I'd argue the opposite: having a king doesn't make you a monarchy, it can make you a republic with a figurehead.

>>1628995
Ethnic nationalism is as bad as globalism

>>1631272
No.

File: 1443480807844.jpg (37KB, 411x399px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 411x399px

>>1628995
>I don't get why ethnic nationalists would decry the French Revolution.
They hate it because French nationalism is at its core civic (much like the Roman civic identity it was based on). You are French by having French citizenship, speaking French and acting French. Even archconservative De Gaulle said that brown, yellow and black Frenchmen are a GOOD thing. As long as they remain a miniscule minority that are eventually absorbed by the majority of course, but he still believed they could become French. He could see Jean-Luc M'gbedel-Ouagadou buying a baguette in a Parisian shop and he'd say "That's a good, honest Frenchman!".

The extreme right (and some though not all on the alt-right) instead draw inspiration from German ethnic nationalism. In their eyes Heinrich al-Berlini will never be a "true" German, no matter how hard he tries. Even John Archer, the 1/16th Prussian-American from Texas, is more of a German than Heinrich.

And that's why ethnic nationalists hate the French Revolution: it laid the foundations of civic nationalism. They don't realize that, in isolation, and with a healthy respect for the native identity and race (as De Gaulle had), civic nationalism is not a bad thing. He was right: in limited numbers it is a good thing to have immigrants. In limited numbers, and preferably spread all over the country. France's Muslim problem wouldn't be half of what it is if they weren't all concentrated in Marseille and St. Denis.

>>1631281
Yeah, it's a stupid idea that filled the void of the monarch. Loyalty is the cornerstone of politics, and so they replaced loyalty to the monarch with loyalty to the race..

>>1631325
>stupid

Yea, whatever.

>>1628566
t. /pol/-tard

if anything it was the fact that germany was allowed to exist at all in any form

>suble /pol/ thread
kys

>>1631337
>>1631345
>muh /pol/ muh racist boogymen, I want diversity!!!

Faggots.

File: 1467619488832.png (345KB, 320x453px) Image search: [Google]

345KB, 320x453px

>>1631337
>>1631345
The weird thing is that the only difference between /his/ and /pol/ is their approach to France and Germany. /his/ loves France and hates Germany while /pol/ loves Germany and hates France. I wonder why this is.

>>1631356
>history
>and
>humanities

>>1631356
>FN politician in OPs pic
>subtly suggesting that Germany should have won WW1
>strawmanning this hard

>>1631365
I know, I'm not even from /pol/

And if you love us, thank you, but if it's because of "muh socialism, equality" or fedora philosophers such as Voltaire...

File: jjrousseau[1].jpg (353KB, 1417x1450px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 1417x1450px

>>1631376
>Preferring Voltaire over Rousseau
Napoleon gets a free pass because he's fucking Napoleon but
>UNIRONICALLY preferring Voltaire over Rousseau

The First World War. Not because Germany lost, but because it happened in the first place. It was the suicide of Europe and ultimately caused the death of Christianity in the West.

>>1631424
I don't like Les """"lumières"""" btw.

>>1629118
>Do you think the olden generals of yore did what they did for fun? They did it because they had a love for the country and would die to see it prosper. So no, it's not female tier selfishness, in fact exactly the opposite. Most great men of history have sacrificed everything in order to get where they are from generals to business Leaders to heads of state. So no, you generally would not get handed your happiness on a silver platter unless you get to the second point in which case it's a quick dice that predicted your social class that you would generally lose because 98% of the population in France at the time was lower class.
this is being blue pilled. Men love to cling to their fantasy of an ideology, a hierarchy, a doctrine, a loyalty towards this hierarchy, this legacy, the fantasy of an enemy and the one of survival. It is literally the most impotent belief.

At least women are egotistic and do not fall for this retarded notions, notions created only because men want to be valued and relevant.

>>1628715
>>1628744
The hanseatic league and the trading cities in Belgium an Netherlands as well as the perfidous Venetian Republic ARE the beginning of capitalism. The tulip bubble market was a thing before the french revolution

>>1631600
Why people can't build their own meaning in existence?

Carl Marx being born.

>>1628566
Definitely Germany's defeat. French Revolution at least had some benefits, I can't really think of any good things that came from WW1 (that weren't technological at least). It was just a shitfest.

File: marechal-foch[1].jpg (37KB, 400x555px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 400x555px

>>1631691
>I can't really think of any good things that came from WW1 (that weren't technological at least). It was just a shitfest.
You should've listened. You should've fucking listened.

>>1631600
I have no idea what your philosophy is, but I think you've managed to piss off every single ideology in the world.

What is regretting that Germany lost WW2 not edgy enough for you idiots anymore?

>>1632486
That would be regretting all those jews surviving.

>>1631677
>Carl
Anglos are scum

>>1629383
Stay mad monarcuck

>>1628566
French Revolution by far

>>1631298
>in isolation, and with a healthy respect for the native identity and race
That's just like saying, communism without scarcity and men's greed. It's a very pointless argument.
Both ideologies have good and bad points. You just have to walk the line between the two, hard as it might be.

>>1631620
>the perfidous Venetian Republic
What did they do to make you butthurt? You better not be an arse-ravaged byzaboo.

>>1629383
>>1633823
Good. I came for these posts exactly.

>ITT actually justifying being a crowncuck
Enjoy your eternal serfdom.

>>1635539
heh, not like a (((cuck))) like you kiddo.
I'm gonna be king, and everyone else is gonna be a serf
heh.

>>1635735
Lad, you would basically live your life sucking the cock of people who are considered low in royalty because someone you never even knew 1000 years down your bloodline was misfortunate with his crops due to weather conditions. You have to be the dumbest plebeian to think monarchism isn't political cuckholdry.

>>1635789
Heh, fucking (((globalist))) shill trying to tell me what to believe in...
Believe me kid, I'm gonna be the coolest king ever and all of my leftist (((classmates))) and (((step-dad))) are gonna bow to me and my harem of asian waifus.

File: 1445398835017.jpg (205KB, 1085x1217px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1085x1217px

>>1635856

File: 1455290807655.png (490KB, 449x401px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 449x401px

>>1628642
It's still better than kings

>>1628566
DESU SENPAI its been all down hill since varus lost europe to rome